Posted by Ashok Ghosh on October 18, 2009 at 2:32am
Arsenic contaminated aquifers in a 5 km. wide study belt along the banks of river Ganga, in Patna, Bhojpur, Vaishali and Bhagalpur districts of Bihar, are used for both drinking and irrigation purposes. Following an intense detection work by this study group, and subsequent reporting of spread of this contamination to eleven other districts, the authorities initiated several mitigation strategies. But no benefit has been noted in the affected districts, and the total vulnerable population in the study belt itself, is estimated to be over 725,000.Furthermore, complexities arise as the fertile lands are doused with irrigation water from these contaminated aquifers. Arsenic has entered into the food chain of Bihar through irrigation water. Many crop plants and vegetables being grown in rural Bihar has been detected with high arsenic content.The consumption of the arsenic infested food is further increasing the disease burden.A large number of patients with confirmed symptoms of arsenicosis have been detected by our study group.A very alarming recent finding by our research group is the detection of high arsenic content (more than 50 ppb) in the water of River Jaminia – flowing parallel to River Ganga in Bhagalpur district of Bihar.This river merges with Ganga and water from this river is being supplied to urban Bhagalpur without any treatment.Surveys conducted show inherent flaws in the organization of mitigation work, the contributory effect of the state’s population burden, socio-economic backwardness, lack of accountability in implementing different mitigation projects, as well as the failure of the decision makers to seek implementing different mitigation projects, as well as the failure of the decision makers to seek community awareness and cooperation for faster mitigation delivery techniques. Bihar is in the danger of repeating Bengal’s mistakes in tackling the arsenic problem.. Failure of textbook mitigation strategies can be augmented by adoption of innovative schemes. This group has already tested a gravity-based arsenic filter in field with desired results and with minimal expenses. Bioremediation with microbes isolated from soils of Maner [Patna] is also giving positive results.Arsenic contamination in Gangetic belt calls for establishment of a centralized knowledge & research hub, wherein, as per the regional peculiarities of arsenic hotspots’ locations, experience and expertise may act upon health impacts and infiltration of arsenic in food chain.MITIGATION STRATEGIES IN PLACE-The geographical and socio-economic backgrounds of the Ganga-Meghna-Brahmaputra Plains have posed a serious challenge to mitigation techniques. The flood plains subject to annual inundation compel the rural population to migrate seasonally. In Bihar, the largely agricultural population has a very low per capita income, with a few agro-based industries to sustain the state’s economy. Low literacy levels also acted as impediment to any development initiative. As a result, general apathy exists among the affected villagers towards these schemes. Non-existent medical facilities and lack of sanitation & hygiene behaviour are another bane in this rural environment.Following the reports of this study group in 2005, and against the above backdrop the authorities implemented the following measures in different parts of the districts. Rainwater harvesting units –These structures were exclusively installed by Public Health Engineering Department in collaboration with UNICEF, to cope with arsenic contamination in all the districts. It was found that poor construction materials were used due to which the structures are crumbling. Due to absence of regular monitoring and maintenance work , the collected water has bacteriological contamination and decomposition, rendering it unfit for any form of human use. Moreover, remote villages have very few constructed buildings, providing flat roofs for rain water collection. The villagers also cannot accept the idea of drinking rooftop water, and hence have reverted to drinking water from contaminated pumps which according to them “was clean and tastes fresh”.• “Swajaldhara Yojna” plan envisaged provision of piped water from arsenic-free aquifers.in Bhojpur. However, this project was unable to reach its desired target due to poor power supply, theft of pipes and diesel fuel, and lack of follow-up action. It has not been able to stop mass evacuation of villagers suffering from high disease incidence and death rates. Added to this is the social stigma of residing in a known arsenic affected area, which is particularly leading to social ostracization in matrimonial matters.• Restoration of open wells –Also implemented under the state’s water quality monitoring & surveillance program, the old existing wells were renovated, treated and covered for re-use. Again due to lack of water quality monitoring and maintenance, these wells were becoming polluted and defunct. Only a few old wells have been restored, leaving large parts of the villages unattended.• Construction of new Sanitary wells-As per the current implementation strategy, each new well construction is a time consuming process, ranging from 7-15 months. In Maner administrative block [ Patna district] a number of such wells have been under construction for over 12 months. The few completed wells are not being sanitized and has no follow-up monitoring of bacteriological contamination and possible arsenic levels.• Use of domestic arsenic filters-Use of domestic filters that were distributed by NGOs could not been sustained for 2 reasons- firstly, there is no mechanism in place to replace the filter candles; secondly, the villagers are not aware of disposal techniques of the used candles, thereby increasing their exposure risk. Many of them are not aware of the life-span of the filter candles.• No contaminated tubewell has yet been capped in Bihar.The above schemes, though well-conceived could not be sustained due to the following main reasons-• The number of implemented schemes is insufficient for the dense population.• Water quality monitoring units exist at panchayat level, but there is lack of follow-up action and lack of communication between the panchayat, block and state levels. Hence the concept of a decentralised, demand driven water quality initiatives is being compromised.• Failure of the authorities to undertake monitoring and maintenance work in the post-construction phase has rendered the projects defunct.• District-level water quality monitoring laboratories are defunct due to ill-maintenance and lack of trained staff.• There is a lack of awareness and sensitization to arsenic contamination , and lack of ownership among the largely illiterate population. These factors have been the biggest contributory factors towards the absence of public participation in these government schemes. Hence, community mobilisation is the sole answer to proper implementation of these schemes.The need of the hour, therefore, is to recognize the basic impediments in resolving the arsenic crisis, and adopt an innovative holistic approach wherein interdisciplinary expertise is effectively utilized. With this end in view, it is proposed that a multidisciplinary Centre of Excellence for Arsenic Contamination Studies be established at a suitable place within the arsenic affected river plains of India.
Any problem in the initial stages is neglected by the Government and as well as the local people. The only solution (in my opinion which may differ with more intellectual people) is to bring awareness in the local people who are using such polluted waters and demostrating them practically to what will happen to them and their progeny due to constant usage of these polluted waters.
When government tries to sort out such issues this way, it meets the same fate. It is evident that the Arsenic problem in Bihar has become a social problem, thus it should be viewed in that perspective. And, most of the mitigation strategies, I presume, have not taken into account the perception of people (sufferers) towards the whole issue. This often leads to un-sustainability of the measures. Did we ask the villagers – how great concern is the Arsenic problem for them? Definitely, no. Their feeling that the contaminated water is clean and taste fresh, is one of such reflections. We spend money without assessing the suitability and social acceptability of the interventions. We also do not involve the villagers, the key stakeholders, in decision making process and this often leads to failure in developing the sense of ownership among stakeholders. We need to sit with villagers, do Participatory Appraisal of the problem and get their input to solve the problem and device a system for sustainability of the interventions; otherwise we will keep on wasting valuable public money at large.
Comments